Author summary
0% 1 analyzed article/video
BS Summary: These Laura Snapes results contain 39 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization , Confirmation Bias , and Halo Effect , with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 17.5% saturation with 2,282 hits . Analysis detected 14,139 faulty-reasoning hits from 13,048 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of 0% (0 of 6,338 authors). This Laura Snapes is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group. Laura Snapes
Author details
Total words: 13,048
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
0% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 0.0% percentile 0.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles13K analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–50%
0.0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Author 1.6% 1.6% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 3.4% 3.4% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 2.2% 2.2% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 17.5% 17.5% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 1.4% 1.4% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 15.2% 15.2% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 15.5% 15.5% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 0.3% 0.3% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 2.8% 2.8% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 12.3% 12.3% Sitewide departure map Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often
0.0% 0.0% 10% 10% 20% 20% 30% 30% 40% 40% 50% 50% Framing Effect: Author 1.6%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 3.4%, sitewide 19.2% Biased Writer Voice: Author 17.5%, sitewide 5.3% Appeal to Emotion: Author 2.2%, sitewide 15.9% Hasty Generalization: Author 15.5%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 15.2%, sitewide 7.5% Halo Effect: Author 12.3%, sitewide 6.7% Appeal to Authority: Author 1.4%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 2.8%, sitewide 9.1% In-Group Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 6.9% Optimism Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 6.0% Overconfidence Bias: Author 5.7%, sitewide 4.6% Anecdotal: Author 4.7%, sitewide 5.2% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 4.8%, sitewide 3.3% Anchoring Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.1%, sitewide 3.7% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 1.2%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 2.7% Bandwagon: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.2% Unattributed Quote: Author 2.1%, sitewide 1.1% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 2.1%, sitewide 0.8% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 1.6%, sitewide 1.9% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst